national assessment of geologic carbon dioxide storage ...€¦ · • identifies storage...

National Assessment of

Geologic Carbon Dioxide

Storage Resources—Results

U.S. Geological Survey

Department of the Interior

Outline for Briefing

• Overview of geologic carbon dioxide

storage

• Energy Independence and Security Act

• USGS assessment methodology

• Geologic model

• Assessment results

• Discussion of results

• Conclusions

Duncan and Morrissey (2011)

What is Geologic CO2

Storage?

Energy Independence and Security Act 2007

TITLE VII—CARBON CAPTURE AND SEQUESTRATION

Subtitle B—Carbon Capture and Sequestration Assessment and Framework

SEC. 711. CARBON DIOXIDE SEQUESTRATION CAPACITY ASSESSMENT.

(b) METHODOLOGY— …shall develop a methodology for conducting an

assessment under subsection (f), taking into consideration—

(1) the geographical extent of all potential sequestration formations in all

States;

(2) the capacity of the potential sequestration formations;

(3) the injectivity of the potential sequestration formations;

(4) an estimate of potential volumes of oil and gas recoverable by injection

and sequestration of industrial carbon dioxide in potential sequestration

formations;

(5) the risk associated with the potential sequestration formations; and

(6) the work done to develop the Carbon Sequestration Atlas of the United

States and Canada that was completed by DOE.

(c) COORDINATION—

(1) Federal Coordination

(2) State Coordination

• World: ~ 9.5 Gt carbon/year or ~ 35 Gt CO2 /year (Peters and

others, 2013)

• U.S. total all energy sectors in 2011 ~ 5.5 Gt/year CO2 (U.S.

Energy Information Administration, 2012b)

• Laramie River 2&3 PC plant 1100 MWe 8.7 Mt/yr CO2 at 85%

capacity factor (Brennan and Burruss, 2006)

How much CO2 needs to be stored?

Some examples illustrate the range:

Mill

ions o

f to

ns o

f C

O2

EIA 2012a, Annual Energy Outlook

Source: North American Carbon Storage Atlas (2012)

• Geologically-based, statistically-sound hypotheses for quantities of resource

• Comprehensive and consistent treatment (compatible/comparable to USGS assessments in other areas)

• Transparent – published methodology, assumptions

• Probabilistic – range of values to reflect geologic uncertainty

• Storage resources are combined to basin, regional, and national scales using probabilistic aggregation to correctly propagate uncertainty

• Geological models are developed for each region, estimates are regional and not project site specific

• External expert input and multiple reviews

• Does not include coal bed or unconventional (shale or tight sand) reservoirs

USGS Methodology Brennan and others (2010); Blondes and others (2013)

• Identifies storage assessment units (SAUs) at depths of 3,000 to 13,000 ft to maintain the CO2 in a supercritical state and maximize the storage resource per unit volume

• Storage formations must be sealed regionally to retain buoyant CO2

• Estimates all pore volume within a storage formation available for CO2 storage

• Incorporates underground source of drinking water (USDW) regulations of the EPA that exclude potential storage formations with water with less than 10,000 milligrams per liter (mg/L) of total dissolved solids (TDS)

• Identifies two storage types: buoyant and residual trapping (with 3 permeability classes)

• Endorsed by the International Energy Agency (IEA) and representatives from multiple national geological surveys, which recommend that regional-scale assessments of geologic CO2 storage capacities should follow the USGS methodology

USGS Methodology – cont. Brennan and others (2010); Blondes and others (2013)

Salinity of water in storage formation must

be > 10,000 mg/L TDS per EPA regulations

Brennan and others (2010); Blondes and others (2013)

Geologic Model S

tan

dard

SA

U

Deep

SA

U

Assessment Assumptions and Constraints The USGS methodology of Brennan and others (2010) and Blondes

and others (2013):

• Does not factor in engineering issues such as injection rate or

time-dependent variables to determine the storage potential of

SAUs

• Estimates resources without consideration either of accessibility

due to land-management or regulatory restrictions or of economic

viability

• Assumes that increases in pressure within the reservoir during

CO2 injection can be mitigated by pressure management:

By water production from the storage formation

To prevent failure of reservoir or seal rock integrity

To prevent induced seismicity

Assessment Resource Categories

1. BSR, buoyant trapping storage resource: mass of CO2 that can be stored

buoyantly beneath structural or stratigraphic traps with the potential to contain

greater than 500,000 barrels of oil equivalent (BOE)

2. R1SR, residual trapping class 1 storage resource: mass of CO2 that can be

stored by residual trapping in rocks with permeability greater than 1 D


stored by residual trapping in rocks with permeability between 1 mD and 1 D


stored by residual trapping in rocks with permeability less than 1mD

5. TASR, technically accessible storage resource: total mass of CO2 that can

be stored in the storage assessment unit (SAU)

6. KRRSR, known recovery replacement storage resource: mass of CO2 that

can be stored in existing producing hydrocarbon reservoirs

Data Sources • USGS National Oil and Gas Assessment publications were a

significant source of reservoir characteristics and other geologic

input parameters

• Data-sharing agreements with numerous State geological surveys

and universities, many of which are members of the DOE National

Energy Technology Laboratory (NETL) Regional Carbon

Sequestration Partnerships

• Two principal proprietary petroleum databases were mined for a

substantial proportion of the data used in the assessments; these

are the oil and gas field and reservoir database from Nehring

Associates, Inc., and the databases of individual well information

from IHS Inc.

• Water-quality data from USGS, NETL, and other datasets available

from State sources

USGS National Assessment of

Geologic Carbon Dioxide Storage

Resources by U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Carbon Dioxide Storage

Resources Assessment Team, 2013a,b,c

Three companion assessment reports:

a. Data - USGS Data Series 774:

http://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/774/

b. Results - USGS Circular 1386:

http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/1386/

c. Summary - Fact Sheet 2013–3020:

http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2013/3020/

36 Basins

202 SAUs (10 nonquantitative SAUs)

Results of the Assessment Estimates of national totals for technically accessible storage resources

(TASR) for carbon dioxide (CO2) in the United States by

resource type and class

Estimates are in billions of metric tons (gigatons, Gt);

mean values sum to totals but are reported to only two

significant figures.

CO2 storage resource type and class P5 P50 P95 Mean

Symbol Name

Storage resource estimated from geologic models

BSR Buoyant trapping storage resource 19 31 110 44

R1SR Residual trapping class 1 storage resource 97 140 200 140

R2SR Residual trapping class 2 storage resource 2,100 2,600 3,300 2,700

R3SR Residual trapping class 3 storage resource 58 120 230 130

TASR (total) Technically accessible storage resource 2,400 3,000 3,700 3,000

Storage resource estimated from petroleum production volumes

KRRSR Known recovery replacement storage

resource 11 13 15 13

Pie charts showing mean estimates of technically accessible storage resources

(TASR) for carbon dioxide (CO2) in the United States by

(A) type and class and (B) region.

Most (89 percent) of the TASR is in the residual

trapping class 2 storage resource category

(mean estimate of 2,700 Gt)

The regions with the largest technically

accessible storage resources are the Coastal

Plains Region (mostly in the U.S. Gulf Coast)

and the Alaska Region (North Slope)

Graph showing the range estimated for the technically accessible storage

resource (TASR) for carbon dioxide (CO2) in each assessed basin in the United

States. Estimates are in millions of metric tons (Mt).

Pie charts showing mean estimates of technically accessible storage

resources (TASR) for carbon dioxide (CO2) in selected regions of the

United States

Western U.S. basins contain variable

amounts of freshwater (<10,000 mg/L

TDS), which will restrict the use of the CO2

storage resource capacity in these basins



United States



United States

The Alaska North Slope petroleum industry may

utilize subsurface petroleum reservoirs for

storage of CO2 that is coproduced with

hydrocarbons or stored during the enhanced-oil-

recovery process using CO2.

Discussion of Results

• The 44 Gt (mean estimate) of buoyant trapping storage resources

includes non-hydrocarbon-bearing reservoir formations, but most of

the resources are well defined by hydrocarbon exploration data

• Deep SAUs account for 16 percent of the total TASR. Any potential

developer of the deep SAUs has to consider the increased

operational pressures needed to inject CO2 at depths greater than

13,000 ft.

• The total geologic storage resources for CO2 in the United States

are large, and both types (buoyant and residual) will probably be

needed to store anthropogenic CO2

• The U.S. Energy Information Administration (2012b) estimated

that the 2011 national energy-related CO2 emissions were 5.5

Gt. The mean estimate by the USGS of the technically

accessible geologic storage resource (TASR) for CO2 in the

United States is 3,000 Gt, which is more than 500 times the

annual energy-related CO2 emissions

• However, the mean buoyant trapping storage resource (BSR) of

44 Gt is approximately eight times the annual energy-related

CO2 emissions, which means that the use of residual trapping

storage resources for CO2 will be required to significantly reduce

anthropogenic CO2 emissions into the atmosphere during the

next few decades

Discussion of Results – cont.

• The USGS has completed an evaluation of the TASR for CO2 for 36

sedimentary basins in the onshore areas and State waters of the

United States

• The mean assessment results are:

TASR = 3,000 Gt of total subsurface CO2 storage capacity that is

technically accessible in onshore areas and State waters

BSR = 44 Gt of storage by buoyant trapping in structural or stratigraphic

closures

R1SR = 140 Gt of Residual Class 1 storage resources

R2SR = 2,700 Gt of Residual Class 2 storage resources

R3SR = 130 Gt of Residual Class 3 storage resources

KRRSR = 13 Gt of known oil and gas recovery replacement storage

resources

• The regions with the largest technically accessible storage

resources are the Coastal Plains Region (mostly in the U.S. Gulf

Coast) and the Alaska Region (North Slope)

Conclusions

Peter D. Warwick, Project Chief

Madalyn S. Blondes

Sean T. Brennan

Marc L. Buursink

Steven M. Cahan

James L. Coleman

Troy A. Cook

Margo D. Corum

Jacob A. Covault

William H. Craddock

Christina A. DeVera

Colin Doolan

Ronald M. Drake II

Lawrence J. Drew

Joseph A. East

Philip A. Freeman

Christopher P. Garrity

Kevin J. Gooley

Mayur A. Gosai

Hossein Jahediesfanjani2

Celeste D. Lohr

John C. Mars

Matthew D. Merrill

Ricardo A. Olea

Tina L. Roberts-Ashby

William A. Rouse

Paul G. Schruben

John H. Schuenemeyer2

Ernie R. Slucher

Brian A. Varela

Mahendra K. Verma

Members of the U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Carbon

Dioxide Storage Resources Assessment Team1

1All members are or were with the U.S. Geological Survey unless otherwise indicated. 2Contractor

http://energy.usgs.gov

http://go.usa.gov/8X8 (USGS geologic CO2 project website)

http://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/774/ (USGS CO2 storage assessment data)

http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/1386/ (USGS CO2 storage assessment results)

http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2013/3020/ (USGS CO2 storage assessment summary)

For more information contact:

Brenda Pierce

[email protected]

703-648-6421

Peter Warwick

[email protected]

703-648-6469

References Blondes, M.S., Brennan, S.T., Merrill, M.D., Buursink, M.L., Warwick, P.D., Cahan, S.M., Cook, T.A., Corum, M.D., Craddock, W.H., DeVera, C.A.,

Drake, R.M., II, Drew, L.J., Freeman, P.A., Lohr, C.D., Olea, R.A., Roberts-Ashby, T.L., Slucher, E.R., and Varela, B.A., 2013, National

assessment of geologic carbon dioxide storage resources—Methodology implementation: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2013–1055,

26 p., available only at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2013/1055/.

Brennan, S.T., and Burruss, R.C., 2006, Specific storage volumes-A useful tool for CO2 storage capacity assessment: Natural Resources Research,

v. 15, no. 3, p. 165-182, DOI: 10.1007/s11053-006-9019-0.

Brennan, S.T., Burruss, R.C., Merrill, M.D., Freeman, P.A., and Ruppert, L.F., 2010, A probabilistic assessment methodology for the evaluation of

geologic carbon dioxide storage: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 2010–1127, 31 p., available only at

http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2010/1127.

Duncan, D.W., and Morrissey, E.A., 2011, The concept of geologic carbon sequestration: U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 2010-3122, 2 p.,

available at http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2010/3122/.

International Energy Agency, 2013, Methods to assess geologic CO2 storage capacity: status and best practice: International Energy Agency

Workshop Report 2013, 43 p., available at http://www.iea.org/publications/freepublications/publication/name,43273,en.html.

Jarvis, A., Reuter, H.I., Nelson, Andrew, and Guevara, Edward, 2008, Hole-filled SRTM [Shuttle Radar Topographic Mission] for the globe, version 4:

available from the CGIAR [Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research]-Consortium for Spatial Information SRTM 90m Database;

Jarvis, A., Reuter, H.I., Nelson, Andrew, and Guevara, Edward, 2008, Hole-filled SRTM [Shuttle Radar Topographic Mission] for the globe,

version 4: available from the CGIAR [Consultative Group for International Agricultural Research]-Consortium for Spatial Information SRTM 90m

Database; available online at http://www.cgiar-csi.org/data/srtm-90m-digital-elevation-database-v4-1#acknowledgements.

North American Carbon Atlas Partnership, 2012, The North American carbon storage atlas (1st ed.): U.S. Department of Energy, National Energy

Technology Laboratory, 52 p., available online at http://www.netl.doe.gov/technologies/carbon_seq/refshelf/NACSA2012.pdf.

Peters, G.P., Andrew, R.M., Boden, Tom, Canadell, J.G., Ciais, Philippe, Le Quéré, Corinne, Marland, Gregg, Raupach, M.R., and Wilson, Charlie,

2013, The challenge to keep global warming below 2 °C: Nature Climate Change, v. 3, p. 4-6, doi:10.1038/nclimate1783 [may require

subscription to access].

Warwick, P.D., and Corum, M.D., eds., 2012, Geologic framework for the national assessment of carbon dioxide storage resources: U.S. Geological

Survey Open-File Report 2012–1024, available only at http://pubs.usgs.gov/of/2012/1024/.

U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2012a, Annual energy outlook 2012 with projections to 2035: U.S. Energy Information Administration [Report]

DOE/EIA-0383(2012), 239 p., accessed September 10, 2012, at http://www.eia.gov/forecasts/aeo/pdf/0383(2012).pdf.

U.S. Energy Information Administration, 2012b, U.S. energy-related carbon dioxide emissions, 2011: U.S. Energy Information Administration Web site,

accessed December 20, 2012, at http://www.eia.gov/environment/emissions/carbon/.

U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Carbon Dioxide Storage Resources Assessment Team, 2013a, National assessment of geologic carbon dioxide

storage resources—Data: U.S. Geological Survey Data Series 774, 13 p., plus 2 appendixes and 2 large tables in separate files,

http://pubs.usgs.gov/ds/774/.

U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Carbon Dioxide Storage Resources Assessment Team, 2013b, National assessment of geologic carbon dioxide

storage resources—Results: U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1386, 41 p., http://pubs.usgs.gov/circ/1386/.

U.S. Geological Survey Geologic Carbon Dioxide Storage Resources Assessment Team, 2013c, National assessment of geologic carbon dioxide

storage resources—Summary: U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 2013–3020, 6 p., http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2013/3020/.

national assessment of geologic carbon dioxide storage ...€¦ · • identifies storage...

Documents